tv Situation Room With Wolf Blitzer CNN March 16, 2017 2:00pm-3:01pm PDT
ahead. >> it's pretty significant. additionally, the k069 for our services one year costs less than one day in the hospital. nutrition is health. the more nutrition you can provide someone, the healthier they're going to be. or they're going to respond better to their treatment. >> alison foreman from michigan, where there are a lot of those forgotten men and women president trump likes to talk about, thanks for your time and what you do. that's it for "the lead." turning it over to wolf blitzer in the situation room right next door. thanks for watching. >> happening now, breaking news, in the tail spin, the white house lashes out after leaders of the senate intelligence committee say they see no indication of any surveillance at trump tower. other top lawmakers, democrats and republicans, make similar statements about the president's claim. but the white house press secretary angrily reads from news stories and refuses to admit the president was wrong. blocked ban, two federal
judges reject the president's revised travel ban and both say they took the president's comments about islam into consideration when making their rulings. death spiral? the republican health care bill staggers through another committee, but under attack by conservatives. is it already on life support? can the house speaker paul ryan revive it? i'll talk to him live this hour. and deep cuts, the president unveils his budget blueprint. it would put more money into the military, but slash spending on agriculture, the environment, health, and housing. i'm wolf blitzer. you're in "the situation room." >> announcer: this is cnn breaking news. >> breaking news, an angry white house digs in to defend the president saying he stands by his unfounded claim that he was wiretapped by president obama. even after top lawmakers one after another reject the president's assertion, the house
speaker paul ryan says, quote, no such wiretap existed. the leaders of the senate intelligence committee say they see no indications that trump tower was the subject of surveillance by any element of the united states government. and their house counterpart says they have yet to see any evidence of wire tang. the democrat on that panel fbi director james comey is likely to debunk the wiretap claim in a public hearing on monday. the white house press secretary sean spicer today was having none of this. angrily reading passages from news reports and commentaries which he insisted bolster the president's case that he was put under surveillance by his predecessor. that comes as two federal judges reject the president's latest travel ban, both saying his past statements about muslims impacted their rulings. remember the white house is forced to watch as the republican plan to replace obamacare makes its way through another committee barely. and the president's first budget
blueprint is attacked for boosting military spending while slashing funds at key agencies. i'll talk about all of this with the house speaker paul ryan. then our correspondents, analysts and guests are standing by with full coverage of the day's top stories. let's begin over at the white house. the white house showing a siege of mentality today as the president's unfounded wiretap claims are dismissed by congressional leaders. first off let's go to our senior white house correspondent jim accosta. jim, extraordinary briefing today with a visibly angry press secretary. you were there in the front row right in the middle of it. >> reporter: that's right, wolf. it was hard to figure out whether this was an episode of saturday night live or an actual white house press briefing as an angry white house press secretary sean spicer refused to answer a question about a statement released by the top two members of the senate intelligence committee. we can put this up on screen. it has to do with the president's wiretapping claims. it says here based on the information available to us we see no indications that trump
tower was the subject of surveillance by any element of the united states government either before or after election day 2016. that is aimed directly at the president's unfounded baseless tweet that former president obama wiretapped him at trump tower. that statement from the senate intelligence committee, wolf, came out just minutes before the scheduled start of the white house press briefing which was ultimately delayed for more than an hour, but when white house press secretary sean spicer finally came out, he was angry as we tried to press him for answers. here's what happened >> there is a statement out today, they have not begun this. as you know yesterday or two days ago, the department of justice asked for an additional week. so, the statement clearly says that at this time that they don't believe that. they have yet to go through the information. the department of justice, as you know, has not supplied this. but i've just read off to you, it's interesting. when the "the new york times" reports -- hold on. thank you, appreciate it. >> so, are you saying that the
president still stands by his allegation that president obama ordered wiretapping or surveillance of trump tower despite the fact that the senate intelligence committee says they see no indication that it happened? does the president still stand by the allegation? >> he stands by it, but again, you're mischaracterizing what happened today. the senate -- no, no -- >> exactly from their statement. >> i understand that. at the same time, they acknowledge that they have not been in contact with the department of justice. so, again, i go back to what i said at the beginning. it's interesting -- hold on, hold on. it's interesting how at the same time where were you coming to the defense of that same intelligence committee and those members when they said there was no connection to russia? you didn't seem to report it then. no, no. so, you want -- hold on. you want to comment and you want to perpetuate a false narrative when -- >> i said clapper said that. >> when those individuals have gone out time and time again when chair nunez has said number one there is no information he's aware of that existed, that got zero reporting.
he said, quote, i think it's very possible. you don't include that in the question mark. the bottom line is the president said last night that he will be providing -- there will be additional information coming forward. there is a ton of media reports out there that indicate that something was going on during the 20-6 election. where was the questioning of the "the new york times" or other outlets when that was going on? >> do you believe he will be vindicated? >> i believe he will. >> you were just quoting sean hannity there. the house and senate intelligence committees -- >> also quoted -- i get you're going to cherry pick. >> you're the -- you're citing sean hannity. >> also tend to overlook all the sources -- i know you want to cherry pick it. you do. but where was your concern about the "the new york times" report? you didn't seem to have a concern with that. >> we have done plenty of reporting on all of this. >> no, no, you want to cherry peck one comment, one piece of commentary. >> the president to the russians, that has all been looked at. >> how do you know all this? how do you seem to be such an expert in this? >> i'm saying that this has been
looked at, sean -- >> how do you know it's been looked at? hold on. i'm sorry, i'm afraid to -- can you tell me how i know this has all been, quote, looked at? you made a statement you said, quote, all of this has been looked at. >> other outlets have reported -- >> so, when your outlet says it's all been looked at -- >> the president and the russians during the 2016 campaign, it sounds like during the context of that investigation there might have been some intercepted communications, the house intelligence committee chairman did mention that and we have reported that. others have reported that. on air and various publications. but, sean, what you are refusing to answer, the question that you are refusing to answer is whether or not the president still refused -- you have a senate and house intelligence committee both leaders from both parties on both of those panels saying that they don't see any evidence of any wiretapping. so how can theme president go o and continue --
>> you're mischaracterizing what chair nunez said. he said it is possible. to suggest that -- you're stating unequivocally you somehow -- >> you said -- >> i think we cleared that up. he said exactly that. the president has already said clearly when he referred to wiretapping he was referring to surveillance. so -- >> it sounds like, sean, you and the president are saying now, well, we don't mean wiretapping any more because that's not true any more. so now we're going to say other forms of surveys lance. what's going to be next ? >> i didn't mean, i think that's cute but at the end of the day we talked about this three or four days. the president had to quote wiretapping in quotes, he was referring to broad surveillance now you're basically going back. we talked about this several days ago. the bottom line is that the investigation by the house and the senate has not been provided all of the information. and when it does -- but where was -- hold on. >> news reports, not evidence -- >> i think what the president addressed that last night and said there's more to come. these are merely pointing out there is widespread reporting that throughout the 2016
election there was surveys lance that was done on ava right of people. that came up -- >> there is investigation going on whether there were contacts between the president's campaign and russians. of course they're going to be looking at these various -- >> i get it. somehow you seem to believe you have all of this information. you've been read in on all of these things which i find very interesting. >> i haven't been read in by the fbi -- uh >> you're coming to conclusions by a guy that has zero intelligence -- >> give me some gsh [laughter] >> i wasn't done, clearance. >> those two panels. >> maybe both. >> come on. those two panels have spoken with the fbi director and told there is no evidence of this. >> i understand. i think this question has been asked and answered, jim. it's interesting how you jump to all of these conclusions about what they have, what they don't have. and you seem to know all the answers. but at the end of the day there was clearly a ton of reporting -- hold on, jim. let me answer -- i think that there has been a vast amount of reporting which i just detailed
about activity that was going on in the 2016 election. there is no question that there was surveillance technique used throughout this. i think by a variety of outlets concluded. when you ask these two people, as chair nunez said yesterday when you take it literally wiretapping, the president has already been clear he didn't mean specifically wiretapping. he had it in quotes. so, i think to fall back on that is a false -- is a false premise. that's not what he said. >> so, there you have it, wolf. the white house is digging in and standing its ground, maintaining that the president does still believe that he was wiretapped or surveilled in some way over at trump tower during the course of the 2016 campaign. and you heard at the top there, i said, you're quoting sean hannity. before that entire exchange happened, wolf, sean spicer was essentially going through a list of various news outlets that he was referring to to back up the president's claim. he referred to sean hannity from fox news, andrew napolitano
another commentator at fox news. these are conservative analysts on that network. they are not news outlets, of course, we do want to point out that sean spicer did mention "the new york times" but again, wolf, as you know and i know, the president has time and again referred to the "the new york times" as the failing "the new york times." so, one of the out lelglets the falling back on to justify the claim is a news outlet they repeatedly described as failing and not reputable. and, so, wolf, this was a very surreal day in the white house briefing room but it's very, very clear at this point that this white house is not backing down. there will be no apology from the president. but, of course, having covered donald trump for the last year and a half as both a candidate and as a president, we know that that's not really in his character, wolf. >> what's obvious, though, jim, is that so much of the focus of attention right now over at the white house is on the president's allegations, unfounded allegations about wiretapping by president obama. it's taking away from their real priorities on domestic issues,
national security issues. it must be taking away a lot of their time and energy. >> that's right. before all of that unfolded we saw nick mulvaney, the director of the office of management and budget walk reporters through the next fiscal year budget that this white house is putting out. it's been described as dead on arrival up on capitol hill, but yet they still want to explain that to the press and the public. meanwhile you have a health care bill that is being talked about up on capitol hill among house republicans that this president has embraced that is really going nowhere at this point. it may not pass the house. it is unlikely to pass the senate. so they have to go to the drawing board on that and you have a travel ban, second attempt that the travel ban the president has attempted is tied up in the courts again. you look all around them, when people in the white house look all around them, all they can see at this point are initiatives and bills and pursuits that have just fallen flat in the first 56 days of this administration. and compounding the problems
that this white house is experiencing is the president keeps making these unfounded claims via twitter and otherwise. whether it's about his inaugural crowds or whether undocumented immigrants are voting or that president obama wiretapped him during the 2016 election. all of this under cuts the credibility of the president of the united states. it is not making people on capitol hill scratch their heads including a lot of republicans, but people all around the world. world leaders like angela merkel who will be here tomorrow. >> angela merkel at the white house will be a news conference. i'll speak with paul ryan for his comments. jim accosta, thanks for your work over there. gloria borger, let me start with you. just to reset right now, the chairman, republican chairman of the senate republican committee, mark warner of virginia, issued a joint statement saying, based on the information available to us, we see no indications that trump tower was the subject of
surveillance by any element of the united states government, either before or after election day 2016. and just moments ago, a spokeswoman for mark warner said, quote, the bipartisan leaders of the intelligence committee would not have made the statement they made without having been fully briefed by the appropriate authorities. yet somehow we just heard sean spicer say the president is standing by his four tweets of nearly two weeks ago, accusing the former president of ordering a wiretap of trump tower. >> it's preposterous, wolf. i don't know any other way to say it. it does remind me of the inaugural crowd issue. it reminds me of the, you know, the 3 million illegal votes cast during the election. and only this is about national security and intelligence. and this is a time, if there ever was any, when you need to take the president literally.
the court last night and today on the travel bani issue, quote the president and took the president literally. now the president's press secretary sean spicer is saying, don't, it is -- don't take him literally. he didn't mean wiretapping. what he meant was brods surveillance. and the more reporters ask the question, the more the white house says, that's been asked and answered. except it hasn't been asked and answered because all of those people who have seen more than we have, have come out, republicans and democrats, including the speaker of the house, and saying, you know what? there isn't any evidence. so, sean spicer was playing today to an audience of one, i believe, which is donald trump. and what he has to do is explain the indefensible, and he didn't do a really great job of doing that today, i'd have to tell you, wolf. >> he still insists that he's
pretty confident the president will be vindicated by all of this. but, you know, the white house is now using the word surveillance as opposed to wiretap. wiretap the president used in those four tweets, a couple of them in quotes, some of them not in quotes. but in this statement that the senate intelligence committee chairman and vice chairman put out, they use the word surveillance as if to deliberately tell the white house there is no evidence of either wiretap or surveillance. >> you know, in many ways i feel bad for republicans on capitol hill. i feel bad for paul ryan who you're going to be speaking with shortly because he has a lot on his plate right now. he is trying to get through a health care bill. he holds a news conference today and is asked, you know, himself, do you believe this is happening? he says, no. i mean, paul ryan has to answer this question in addition to that just so he can put this all in -- line it all up. you have the top republican in the house and in the senate, then top democrat in the house and senate who have both said that they have seen no evidence.
you've seen jeff sessions yesterday morning in richmond, virginia, he has never briefed the president upon this. of course, you have what we saw today, you have the white house doubling down and quite frankly donald trump extending the story another two weeks by saying within the next two weeks you're going to see something. >> it seems like this isn't something that they want to really wipe off the front pages of the newspapers, or do away with in terms of these press briefings where we saw sean today having to engage. this, i think, is another example of donald trump being on an island. and we saw him in many instances with birtherism essentially be on an island. i think this whole tale that he began to spin on twitter really gets at this paranoid idea that his administration has about this deep state. again, it demon izes obama. his base is used to characterizing oel bama as the other, someone is out to get donald trump and somebody who is
an enemy of america in some ways. in that way he thinks it works to bind him to his base. and i don't think we're going to see him quit this theory. >> hold your thought for a moment. i want to take a quick break. there is a lot more coming up. the republican obamacare replacement bill advances through another committee. but it's under attack from all sides. i'll talk about that. health care, all the day's top stories including the white house doubling down on the president's assertions against the former president, the house speaker paul ryan standing by to join us live right after this. ready, go. ahhhhhhhh! shake! shake! shake! shake! shake! done! you gotta shake it! i shake it! glad i had a v8. the original way to fuel your day. if you have moderate to severe ulcerative colitis or crohn's, and your symptoms have left you with the same view, it may be time for a different perspective.
if other treatments haven't worked well enough, ask your doctor about entyvio, the only biologic developed and approved just for uc and crohn's. entyvio works by focusing right in the gi-tract to help control damaging inflammation and is clinically proven to begin helping many patients achieve both symptom relief as well as remission. infusion and serious allergic reactions can happen during or after treatment. entyvio may increase risk of infection, which can be serious. while not reported with entyvio, pml, a rare, serious brain infection caused by a virus may be possible. tell your doctor if you have an infection, experience frequent infections, or have flu-like symptoms, or sores. liver problems can occur with entyvio. if your uc or crohn's medication isn't working for you, ask your gastroenterologist about entyvio. entyvio. relief and remission within reach. and her new mobile wedding business.tte at first, getting paid was tough... until she got quickbooks. now she sends invoices, sees when they've been viewed and-ta-dah-paid twice as fast for free.
we're following the breaking news tonight. the white house angrily lashing out at reporters after the chairman and vice chairman of the senate intelligence committee publicly rejected president trump's claims against president obama for allegedly wiretapping trump tower. the house speaker paul ryan is standing by live. i'll ask him about that as well as the republican health care bill which made it through another committee today. but it's already gasping for some breath. mainly because of strong opposition from republicans. let's go to cnn's sunlen. does this bill still have a chance of moving through the house and moving over to the senate? >> the bill in its current form, wolf, does not look good at all. you have a growing number of republicans up here on capitol hill opposing it and the house republican leadership is paying attention to that. they understand that, and that is why we've seen them in the recent days really shift into a different gear, now saying they are going to make some small changes and tweaks to this bill to make this bill into something
that can actually pass on the house floor. >> those oppose no? >> no. >> reporter: with opposition growing. >> i'm still a no. we need a couple big, big changes. >> reporter: house speaker paul ryan is cramibling launching a furious behind the scenes effort to wrangle the republican votes he needs to save the health care bill in the house. >> clearly the main parts of this bill are going to stay exactly as they are. but we're making those improvements and refinements base upon the feedback we're getting from our members. >> reporter: but the speaker's message not totally in line with president trump. >> these are going to be negotiated. we have to go to the senate, we're going to see what happens in the senate. >> reporter: ryan today trying to convince skeptics that they are on the same page. >> we are clearly in sync on this. we're working very hand in glove on this and the president's team. >> reporter: meantime the white house is stepping up their sales pitch. >> we believe strongly, strongly that the plan that we put forward is so much better than the one that's there now. >> reporter: vice-president pence to capitol hill again
today, but that is done little to convince wave erring and outright dissenting republicans to get on board. >> the bill doesn't do what we said. >> do i have some concerns, yes. >> reporter: the support on capitol hill is grim, with very little margin for error. according to cnn's latest vote count, 20 lawmakers are now flat out opposed to or leaning against it. speaker ryan can afford to lose no more than 21 republicans to pass the bill. meantime, the conservative freedom caucus adamantly opposed to the bill is going a step farther. >> i'm confident that there are not enough votes to pass this bill in its current form. >> reporter: the group's chairman declaring he has 25 no votes, enough to kill the bill. but on capitol hill today, the house bill did inch forward. >> the ayes are 19 and the no's are 17. >> reporter: passing through the budget committee. >> the american health care act for 2017 is ordered reported to the house of representatives with a favorable recommendation. >> reporter: all this as senate
republicans continue to fire warning shots. >> as much as you want to say that this plan on the outside is absolutely what republicans are doing, that's not true. i've got to tell you it's not true. >> reporter: and remind the president that he's in the thick of this fight. >> i brought them copies of the art of the deal because i think we're in the pre-negotiation stage. >> reporter: this bill now goes on to the rules committee and that's where speaker ryan can potentially make the small changes he wants and this is where the hard part essentially starts because he's got to make enough changes to attract new conservative support, but not make too many changes to lose the moderate support up here on capitol hill. now, he has taken a recent days to calling this the sweet spot that he's looking for, but, wolf, that is a sweet spot that has been very elusive so far. >> all right, sunlen, thank you. joining us from capitol hill. also joining us from capitol hill is the speaker of the house representative paul ryan of wisconsin. mr. speaker, thanks for joining us. >> you bet, would have. good to be with you. >> i want to get to health care and repealing and replacing
obamacare in a moment. let's talk about this major breaking news today, the white house reinforcing themselves saying they are sticking with the president's four tweets almost two weeks ago accusing president obama of wiretapping trump tower in new york. you said today you do not believe president trump's claims, the trump tower was wiretapped on the orders of president obama. if you don't believe the president on this, how can you trust him on other issues? >> what i said was i have not seen any evidence that this occurred based upon the briefings that i have seen. i think that's what you probably heard from -- i didn't hear what devin nunez and adam schiff said, but i think they basically said the same thing. i didn't say anything about the president's tweets. i said i haven't seen evidence this has occurred. the intelligence committee hasn't seen evidence this has occurred. they have an investigation going on all things russia. they have not completed that investigation so we'll see at the end of the day what that investigation turns up with respects to russia, the campaign and everything else. heretofore, we have not seen any
evidence. there is nothing new here. i've been saying this a few days. >> but you've been briefed by the highest law enforcement -- >> that's the point i'm making. >> you're one of the leaders of that so-called gang of 8. you've heard the most sensitive classified information. you've raised this issue with all of them and they have provided you, you say, with no evidence at all to back up what the president tweeted. >> that's what i just said. we have not seen any evidence that there was a wiretap or a fisa court order or somebody in trump tower. >> so, should the president of the united states, you believe, apologize to former president obama obama and apologize to the american people for making such an assertion? >> i'm going to leave it to him to make his decisions. i think he was responding to news reports and to some articles that were out there. frankly i didn't know about those articles until a handful of days ago. there were articles buzzing around newspapers and internet and magazines suggesting this. i think that's probably what he's responding to.
>> before the president makes an accusation like this against his predecessor, instead of relying on news reports, he should speak with officials, speak with those officials who would know if there was a fisa warrant, who would know if there was any wiretap that was ordered against trump tower in new york city. >> well, i can't speak to that. all i can say is i have not seen the evidence. i have spoken with those people and i don't know if he had. i don't think he had actually before then. >> well, he clearly hasn't spoken to anyone and he got that information -- i don't know if you heard sean spicer, the white house press secretary today, but he made it clear that the president was relying on news reports that were making these suggestions. >> right. >> and they're still not backing away fwr it even though there is no evidence to back it up. just to remind our viewers out there, let me read a couple of those tweets because they're pretty outrageous when you hear it. terrible, just found out that obama had my wires tapped at trump tower just before the victory. nothing found. this is mccarthyism. a few minutes later, is it legal for a sitting president to be wiretapping a race for president prior to an election?
turned down by a court order. a new low. few minutes later, i bet a good lawyer could make a great case out of the fact that president obama was tapping my phones in october just prior to election. and then a few minutes later, how low has president obama gone to tap my phones during the very sacred election process? this is nixon watergate. bad, or sick guy. those are pretty outrageous, almost two weeks later there is no evidence to back up any of that. so, what's your bottom line message right now to the american people? >> my bottom line is that i have seen no evidence of this occurred. that's been given to me from let's say members of the intelligence committee, people who would be in charge of such things. the intelligence committee is stul still doing an investigation. everything dealing with russia. all of their attempts to meddle in the campaign. look, that's not a new story. we know russia meddled in our election, tried to meddle in our election. the question is let's go to the bottom of it, make sure we can stop it from ever happening again and give our allies the
tools they need to prevent russia from dpog so. this investigation is still going through. i think that's what we just have to wait and see. let it run its course and find out everything we can possibly know about it to make sure that things that need to be fixed get fixed. >> bottom line also, the false statements like these, like these four tweets, does it damage the president's credibility here in the united states and around the world? >> look, i think -- i think the president is going to be marked and judged by his record. i think he's going to be marked and judged by the results we achieve. i think the president is going to be marked and judged and viewed around the world by whether we rebuild our military, regrow our economy, repeal and replace this health care law that's, you know, so damaging health care in america. that's what i think is going to matter. i meet with people from foreign countries all the time. i met with the prime minister of ireland today. and i think what matters is results, policies, do we achieve our goals. that's what's going to matter at the end of the day. >> i'm going to talk about health care, but you still personally trust president trump? >> yes. >> let's talk about health care
right now. the health care bill to repeal and replace obamacare, you dispute the congressional budget office numbers about how many people would lose insurance. what's your own estimate of how many americans -- >> i don't dispute it. i think what was important was cbo put a qualifier on why and how they arrive at that estimate. and that's what i point to. i think it's pretty informative. what cbo is basically saying is if the government stops forcing people to buy something they don't want to buy, they're not going to buy it. if the government does not expand medicaid in the future, that means future people won't -- less people will go on medicaid. that's what they're saying effectively. so, they're not saying that we're going to be taking away something from somebody next year or two years from now. it's that people given the freedom of choice will choose not to take this benefit, not to take this obamacare. that's the point i'm trying to say, which is let's look at what cbo said and the reasons for their insurance coverage estimates. i would note these coverage estimates are hard to nail down.
they were pretty off by a good margin with respect to what they thought people would be taking obamacare today. they thought more and more people would be in owe bam care today than are. that's because people don't like obamacare. the point i make in all of this, wolf, is the law is collapsing. five states have only one insurer left, one carrier left. over a thousand counties, one out of three counties in america, only one carrier left. they're leaving the market and premiums are skyrocketing. >> let me prels you on that one point. if that expanded medicaid program goes away, let's say in 2020, how many people would lose their health insurance then? >> well, we're giving the states the ability to control medicaid and they can tailor medicaid to meet their own needs. i can't tell you how many governors we hear from, democrats and republicans, who say, let me run medicaid in my state. give me the flexibility. i know my state better than you do in washington. >> do you have an estimate of how many people would lose their health insurance? >> it isn't the cbo estimate. i can't remember the breakdown of that number, but the cbo says if in the future states don't
expand medicaid, then that means fewer people won't go on medicaid. by the way medicaid is broken. medicaid doesn't work. more and more doctors don't even take medicaid in the first place. what goods is your coverage if you can't get a doctor? so the point we're making is let's give the states the ability to take this program over because they know better how to fix and help health care for people who are needy. i can tell you, in wisconsin, we could do a far better job of customizing and fixing medicaid if we get the ability to do so from the federal government. that's why we want to turn control of medicaid back to the states and give our governors the ability and the tools and the flexibility to fix this problem once and for all because the system is not working. the system is unsustainable. and more and more people aren't getting good coverage. so, we believe by giving governors more flexibility, by giving the states the ability to customize medicaid to meet their needs of their specific populations that need medicaid, and then replacing obamacare with a patient centered system, risk pools, tax credits, savings
accounts, we think those are the secrets to success of a viable market place people can get affordable health care coverage. >> we went back to 2009 when obamacare was being debated and this is what you said, i'll put it up on the screen. before congress changes health care as the american people know it, we must know the likely consequence of the house democrat legislation including the number of people who would lose access to their current insurance, the number of jobs lost due to business taxes, the number of uninsured people who would obtain coverage and the extent of the cannibalization of the employer coverage due to medicaid expansion. so, why is that information not necessary this time around, although specifics you wanted in 2009? >> far from it. i'm not suggesting -- we are the ones who asked for the cbo report. we're the ones who said, cbo, please give us an analysis of this plan. and, so, that's why i say i'm actually -- i take solace in the cbo plan. what the cbo plan says is the cbo estimate says when our reforms kick in, premiums start going down. it's fiscally responsible.
so, that's -- we're the ones who asked for the cbo to do what you just described. so, back then, by wait, i would say the government estimators why way off on obamacare. remember what president obama said? if you like your plan you can keep it. 4.7 million people lost the plan they liked. remember he said they were going to lower premiums $2,500 on average it didn't do that, it went up $3,000 on average. so, i would simply suggest, wolf, that obamacare is a series of broken promises. those estimates were way off. we've asked the cbo to estimate our bill and this is what we're basing our legislation on. the good news is with this good estimate we have, we haven't gotten to phase 2 and 3 of our three-part program here which is get the secretary of health and human services to open up market freedom. lets the states go back and offer plans and a new place some more plans can come into the market. we want more insurers in the market, not just one. also the other bills we want to pass, association health plans so small businesses can bulk buy
insurance nationwide, let people shop across state lines. deal with medical liability reforms so we can lower the practice of the defense of medicine, all those things dramatically lower the cost of health care. and, so, we're comforted by the fact we are on the right pact here. you mentioned -- i heard you're in the preview you had, this is legislating. we're listening to our members and making the kinds of refinements, the kinds of additions and improvements to the bill we think as i say gets the sweet spot gets the bill everyone likes, everybody can support because it's just really important we get this right. the reason it's really important we get this right is because obamacare is collapsing. we can't just sit back and watch it happen. we have an obligation and duty to do what we said we would do when we ran for office and that is replace obamacare with a much better system. >> i want to remind our viewers that cbo's estimate is within a year 12 million people would lose their health insurance, 24 million would lose it over the next decade even if they're wrong, the numbers --
>> you're not going to force them to take obamacare. >> still millions of people losing health care. >> which will get access to tax credits and they'll be able to buy what they want to buy. you're making it look like there is nothing replacing obamacare. that is just not the case, wolf. what we're suggesting is let's have state based federal financing. give straight coverage for people with catastrophic illnesses so they get good coverage and don't go poor if they get really sick. by covering those people in risk pools, everybody else who buys health insurance doesn't have to cover that. you dramatically lower the price of their insurance. it works because i know it because we did it in wisconsin before obamacare abolished our risk pool i. give people refundable tax credits who don't get it from their job. we want to end the discrimination in the tax code against people who don't get health care at work. doing these things gives people access to choices. it gives them the wherewithal and the means to buy a health care plan of their choosing that they like. obamacare doesn't do that and cbo says yeah you're not going to force people to biobama care, a lot of people aren't going to biobama care.
what we're saying is we're going to give you the freedom to buy what you want. >> your critics are saying you're going way too fast. you have said repeatedly you're not jamming this bill down people's throats, you're going to go through regular order. >> yes. >> but the bill has gone through now, what, three committees without any significant changes to those committee meetings were overnight. they were done before that cbo score. the congressional budget office. submit the house budget committee, pushed through the bill, much more quickly than expected this morning and several of your own members, republicans have complained they haven't been able to make any changes. so, how do you say this is not being jammed down members' throats? >> first of all it's not. it's a four-committee process. the budget committee i used to chair the budget committee. they can't amend the bill. it doesn't have that ability. the 74 budget act does not allow amendments to be made at budget committee. amendments can be made at rules committee. so that's just the process that we have. we didn't amend the bill in ways and means in commerce because we were waiting for the score. it's very, very common for
authorizing committees to go before the score arrives. the score arrives, then you go to budget committee and then you can make amendments at rules committee. literally this is the process we have here. it is the time, tested 1974 budget office -- budget process. we have been run on this for seven years. we built this plan starting last january, a year ago january to june. we gave it to the country. we said this is what we think is a better way to replace health care. we ran for election in 2016 on this vision of repealing and replacing obamacare. then since the election we've been working with our counterparts in the senate with the white house to get this thing right and now we're listening to our members which is what the legislative process does, is, requires to get it right, to find the sweet spot so people have a bill that they can enjoy, that they can support. and the reason i'm excited about this is because i think this is an opportunity for us. it's an opportunity for us to fix a broken system that is failing, that is crashing. and to get at the goal of giving people access to affordable coverage and we want to make sure we get it right.
that's why we're not -- we didn't just take this to the floor. we didn't write this in harry reid's office on christmas eve like they did obamacare and jamb it through. we're going through regular order. by wait after we're done with all the stuff i just said then it goes over to the senate and they start all over again. it goes to the senate and they amend it and they do what they want to do to it. that's the legislative process. >> some of your republican colleagues say they don't think they can get 51 votes let alone 60. they will eventually need to get this enacted. everything you're doing in the house now is really for naught. >> well, senators aren't helpless to what the house does. here's the electricity i have process. i know you know this but i'll explain it for your viewers. the house passes legislation. it sends it to the senate. then the senate takes up that legislation. they'll have a bunch of amendments. they'll make changes if they want to. if they get support for changes they'll make those changes. and then if there is a difference in the two bills, we go to a conference committee and we iron out those differences. that's the legislative process. so, senators, if they want to make a change, they have a process in order to do that.
when the bill goes to them and they go through their legislative process. >> i know you have to run. one final question, mr. speaker, you've been generous with your time. you said the president has been helping to conskrins members of your republican caucus to support your bill. each day seemingly more members are coming out and saying they're going to vote no. can you name specific members that the president has turned from no to yes? >> i'm not going to get into all that. it's not my bill. it's our bill. it's the american health care act. this is the bill we wrote with the administration, with our friends in the senate. so, this is a collaborative effort between the house and the senate and the white house and the president is the one who is doing a lot of listening from our members, mediating differences, getting ideas and we're working together to try and iron out these differences to make improvements. by the way, there's one word to describe all of this. it's called legislating. this is what legislators do. this is our process. the reason you know about it, the reason it's all on tv is because it's open and transparent. people see what we're doing. these kinds of conversations, this is how bills are supposed to go into law. we call it regular order and the
president is playing a very effective role. he's been very productive, very effective listening to people's concerns, bringing them in to a table, talking at that table and now we're trying to see what we can do to accommodate the people's concerns to get what i call the sweet spot, a bill that we can pass because it's just important we get it right. if we sit back and just watch obamacare crash that does so much damage to so many people. we want to fix this problem by repealing a crashing system and replace it with one that works. >> mr. speaker, thanks once again for your time. we hope you come back. i know you have your hands full right now. but after the final floor vote we'd love to have you back in the situation room. >> good to be with you. take care. >> thank you very much. paul ryan is the speaker of the house. let's get some analysis. gloria, we just heard him say he thinks he's going to make it happen. send it to the senate, they can then figure out what to do there. go to a conference committee, come up with some sort of compromise and repeal and replace obamacare. >> done, finished. >> easy, we can move on. >> by the way, the president is
a full partner and the president has been very effective and very productive as he said. i mean, here's the speaker of the house who has been thinking about and trying to legislate for the past however many years, and he is a legislator. he is somebody who really didn't want to become speaker of the house. he really wanted to stay on the legislatively and run the tax committee or the budget committee or whatever it was. instead now he's the speaker trying to get this legislation through. he must be driven crazy, i must say, by the daily questions about donald trump's tweets in the morning before breakfast, and he has spent the last couple of weeks having to answer questions about the wiretapping. and today he just said to you he has not seen any evidence, but there is still an investigation ongoing into russia. so, paul ryan lines up with the leaders of the intelligence
committee in the senate and adam schiff saying, you know, he hasn't seen anything yet. he was pretty forthright about it. >> he would love to talk about health care. i'd love to talk about legislation, but you could see not very anxious to talk about these allegations that president trump leveled against president obama. >> right. for our viewers who don't know a lot about paul ryan, he's very wonkish as gloria said, began his career as an aide on capitol hill. would rather crunch numbers than try to herd cats which is what we're seeing him do right now. and not so successfully because of the bill. what is interesting, though, a couple things. one is he said obamacare is collapsing which we've heard him say over and over again. he said we can't sit back and see it happen. which is diametrically different from donald trump saying let's let it collapse. shows how much invested he is. he's giving donald trump as much room to stay on in support of the bill. if he loses donald trump he loses the bill. >> doesn't look like the
president is being that assertive right now on repealing and replacing. he was in michigan yesterday, didn't mention it. he spoke about it later in the day when he was in tennessee. >> we haven't heard him really tweet about it. twitter is something he likes to take to and make all sorts of claims and boasts about all sorts of things. so far i think there's been essentially one tweet about this where he did call it our health care plan, but i think today we heard something new from ryan. this idea that donald trump is in there twisting arms and listening and trying to come to some deal. we'll see if that happens. so far you've seen people try to say is this trumpcare, is this ryan care, this trump/ryancare? basically they say it's our health care. we'll see. there have been all sorts of, you know, ups and downs in this. we'll see if it passes the house. >> we'll see what happens. it's going to be relatively soon, that floor vote moved through three committees already. stand by. he got his start with richard nixon as a long-time advisor to donald trump.
will roger stone have to tell congress what he knows about russian hackers? and last year's presidential election? it's feeling up thinking up living up. it's being in motion... in body in spirit in the now. boost. it's not just nutrition. it's intelligent nutrition. with 26 vitamins and minerals and 10 grams of protein. all in 3 delicious flavors. it's choosing to go in one direction... up. boost. be up for it. we kwaxed and shined.to be treated like a trophy. we have seen the glory come, go, and come again. but a cadillac is no trophy. what you see is our future and it will inspire every car that follows. ♪
♪ tech: at safelite, we know how busy your life can be. mom: oh no... tech: this mom didn't have time to worry about a cracked windshield. so she scheduled at safelite.com and with safelite's exclusive "on my way text" she knew exactly when i'd be there, so she didn't miss a single shot. i replaced her windshield giving her more time for what matters most. tech: how'd ya do? player: we won! tech: nice! that's another safelite advantage. mom: thank you so much!
hi, i'm frank. i take movantik for oic, opioid-induced constipation. had a bad back injury, my doctor prescribed opioids which helped with the chronic pain, but backed me up big-time. tried prunes, laxatives, still constipated... had to talk to my doctor. she said, "how long you been holding this in?" (laughs) that was my movantik moment. my doctor told me that movantik is specifically designed for oic and can help you go more often. don't take movantik if you have a bowel blockage or a history of them. movantik may cause serious side effects, including symptoms of opioid withdrawal, severe stomach pain and/or diarrhea, and tears in the stomach or intestine. tell your doctor about any side effects and about medicines you take. movantik may interact with them causing side effects. why hold it in? have your movantik moment. talk to your doctor about opioid-induced constipation.
have you learned. it has been controversial in every step of the way. >> members want to bring stone before committee investigating russians hacking because of comments he made of ties to hackers. >> reporter: well versed in political welfare who got his start with richard nixon. tonight, key members want to hear about roger stones with hackers who tried to disrupt the u.s. elections. >> he and others should be questioned. >> mark warner tells cnn he's concerned of stone's contact. >> u.s. officials say -- one staffer tells cnn, stone will be called to testify on the senate holds
holds hearings on the commission. adam scheff is eager to speak with stone. >> that concerns me a great deal when you have someone with direct communications with the campaign >> stone left the trump campaign in august 2015, but twice in 2016, during the campaign, stone claims to have back channel communications with founder of wikileaks which published some of the damaging democratic e-mails. >> stone said this to show time. >> you said that i believe on multiplications publicly that you have a back channel. >> we have some connections to assad. >> stone has explained he got his information from a friend who spoke with assad but it was not a communication. more than a month of clinton's
campaign of john podesta's e-mails. >> you probably predict that this bigs a lot egs a lot of qu that i would like answers on. >> and stone says while he exchanged a few tweets aprivate messages with gucci fer 2. 0. it was after the hacking o curbed. >> any suggestions is fabrication. now, stone sees conspiracy in a hit and run accident on palm beach florida. the driver of the vehicle who hit the car he was riding on had tinted windows and t-boned his vehicle and took off. >> it fits with stone o's
political style. maybe it is true or it is not. it is the motive behind the accident that stone is alleging and that's what makes it entertaining. >> stone told that cnn affiliate that he testifies before congress he will be able to prove that the narrative that the trump campaign had ties to russia is false. a narrative that stone believes is a bases of mr. trump being surveillance surveillanced. >> coming up, congressional leaders from both parties say they see no evidence that president trump was wiretapped. the white house says the president stands by is unfounded claim. wh akes this simple the best simple salad ever? heart healthy california walnuts. the best simple veggie dish ever? heart healthy california walnuts. the best simple dinner ever? heart healthy california walnuts. great tasting, heart healthy california walnuts.
won't replace the full value of your totaled new car. the guy says you picked the wrong insurance plan. no, i picked the wrong insurance company. with liberty mutual new car replacement™, you won't have to worry about replacing your car because you'll get the full value back including depreciation. and if you have more than one liberty mutual policy, you qualify for a multi-policy discount, saving you money on your car and home coverage. call for a free quote today. liberty stands with you™. liberty mutual insurance.
happening now, breaking news, president trump refuted, the white house blasts the media and refused to backed down from the president's claim he was wiretapped. and speaker house paul ryan all say they see no evidence. how long will the white house stand on this explosive. >> a top democrats say fired national security adviser, michael flynn was paid for more than 30,000 by russian tv for his speech. >> lack of con sensensus, one republican congressman says there are not enough votes to sink in. what will happen next? >> going to court, the white house vows to appeal rulings,